You CAN NOT euphemistically excuse this by saying you are doing “honorable work.” This is NOT HONORABLE WORK, the denial of your solemn oath of office, to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

You cannot say, “the violations were not deliberate,” “not malicious evil wrongdoing” or “in the heat of battle,”[1] I have the undisputed evidence that they were NOT!!!!!!!!! This is ALL-PUBLIC now, exposed, an enormous, criminal, deliberate, depraved and indifferent conspiracy against rights. It has been ON-GOING excruciatingly for 2,795 days, 7.657534247 years WITHOUT REGARD to the constitutionally declared and assured RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!! I have been yelling at the top of my lungs virtually every minute, SUFFERING every second of every day from the criminal denial of rights. This is about the loss of my own flesh and blood, MY SON, the loss of liberty, the loss of property and the loss of the essence of life… TIME..

I am not some crazy

conspiracy fanatic.

I am not some crazy conspiracy fanatic; I do not see conspiracies everywhere. I have first hand knowledge of this one. I have endured over 7 years of criminal denial, 411 days of illegal incarceration[2], two psychological examinations, and over three years of abject poverty, homelessness and life on the street in my struggle, Jeep v. United States of America.[3]

My issues revolve around unconcealed corrupt actions of the police, the prosecutors and the judges. The COURT RECORD CONFIRMS IT. This corruption was enumerated at or near the time of its occurrence. Yours and other’s subsequent cover up of these negligent, malicious and corrupt actions is a criminal, deliberate, depraved and indifferent conspiracy against rights (Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights ).

I do not see a conspiracy against rights in “Texan declared innocent after 30 years in prison.” Eyewitnesses make mistakes there is no avoiding it. It could be likened to a fact of life almost, “Eyewitness: How Accurate Is Visual Memory?”(60 Minutes). Given that eyewitness testimony is humanly fallible mistakes will happen, we need to improve the way we utilize eyewitness testimony to establish guilt e.g., double blind photo arrays, unbiased computer photo lineups. As suggested by the 60 Minutes story in North Carolina:

“Showing victims lineup photos one at a time and emphasizing that the right answer may be none of the above, having lineups conducted by a person who doesn't know who the suspect is, or not by a person at all.

One system now used in a handful of cities is computer software Mike Gauldin helped develop to have a laptop conduct photo lineups.

But law professor Rich Rosen says that in the vast majority of places, there's been no reform, and that needs to change. "This is something that police officers can and should be in favor of," he told Stahl.” and other auditing measures.”[4]

The issue comes down to culpability in Texas and North Carolina as referenced in the two cases above, the Police and Prosecutors may have been over zealous but they did not violate established procedures. In Connick v. Thompson (09-571), a case currently before the Supreme Court, the prosecutors are claiming ignorance of the law. Ignorance of the law cannot be allowed or that becomes EVERYONE’s excuse. “Ignorantia juris non excusat” is a well-established axiom of both Civil and Criminal Law. Especially so with the Brady Rule, a result of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), it has been on the books for nearly 50 years.

In my cases, I told the police officers, the prosecuting attorneys, the State Judges, the State Appeals Court Judges, the Federal Judges, the Federal Appeals Court Judges and the Supreme Court they had made CONSTITUTIONAL mistakes before we went to trial and then repeated it before adjudication in the form of formal pretrial[5] and post trial motions,[6] objections and appeals. Nonetheless the Police Officers, the Prosecuting attorneys and the Judges confirmed their criminality by purporting and/or allowing negligent, malicious, and corrupt testimony and adjudications to stand, thus the criminal, deliberate, depraved and indifferent conspiracy against rights is UNDENIABLE. These issues are the direct result of the denial of my 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendment RIGHTS. The 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendment RIGHTS as interpreted in my case have been on the books since the ratification of the Constitution in 1791. The only issue is the corrupt, malicious and unconstitutional Judge Made Law of ASOLUTE IMMUNITY for all.[7]

Clearly the 1st Amendment right to government redress and the Statute Civil[8] Law[9] were written for this purpose. It is the self serving CRIMINAL, deliberate, depraved and indifferent conspiracy against RIGHTS that see it differently. There is no excuse for the undeniable CRIMINAL, deliberate, depraved and indifferent conspiracy against RIGHTS[10]!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

[9] "Whatever other concerns should shape a particular official's actions, certainly one of them should be the constitutional rights of individuals who will be affected by his actions. To criticize section 1983 liability because it leads decision makers to avoid the infringement of constitutional rights is to criticize one of the statute's raisons d'etre." Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622 (1980) Page 445 U. S. 657

I was held to answer on TWO infamous charges without probable cause, much less proof of any wrongdoing. Because of absolute immunity I had NO RECOURSE to the protection of the laws.

This is and has BEEN an ongoing denial of my 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendment RIGHTS in State Court. There is no case for the Federal Courts refusal to support and defend the Constitution per the 14th Amendment:

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

How do you do you expose a wrong, when the other side has ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, the overwhelming gravitational power of a Black Hole to literally consume without a trace all the light, evidence, effort and truth you use to expose it????

Re: Absolute Immunity is an all-consuming Black Hole, it consumes all efforts to expose it.

Dear Ms. Perry,

Saw a quote the other day in the New York Times I thought described your alleged “honorable work,” the “Black Hole” conspiracy against rights, and your use of power very well:

"He (or yourself) goes along, pretends to be a gentleman, pretends to be accommodative, pretends to be seriously committed to the law, and turns around, sending people (away), beating up people, using violence to coerce and to literally defend power for the sake of defending power."[1]

That person described above, not unlike the American Judiciary, is a petty despotic dictator. You both “defend power for the sake of defending power." You cannot tolerate the essence of civil liberty, the protection of the laws for “We the People” have rights we can assert:

“The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection. In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.”[2]

You are reaching back into history for the flawed Royalist’s and / or Federalist’s assertion of requirement for an absolute ruler, unfettered by the rights of the common man. We do not live under the absolute prerogative of a King. “We the People” live under the Rule of Law as defined by the inviolable and inalienable Civil Rights in our Constitution for the United States of America as the Supreme Law of the land.

Our Justice system was instituted to establish Justice under the law. But the Broad Based Depraved Black Hole Conspiracy of Deliberate Indifference to rights has awarded itself “absolute immunity from subsequent damages liability for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process.”[3] They cannot be held to provide the protection of the laws. They cannot even be held to a minimum “duty of care” standard as regards the protection of the laws. “We the People” are powerless in the face of this absolute immunity. We are nothing more than chattel to the new King’s, the judiciary’s, prerogative.

You have seen the evidence in my case; Jeep v. United States of America,[4] it is undisputed. Absolute Immunity has victimized me. I have endured over 7 years of criminal denial, 411 days of illegal incarceration[5], two psychological examinations, and over three years of abject poverty, homelessness and life on the street in my struggle, Jeep v. United States of America.

I was held to answer two infamous charges without probable cause, much LESS proof of any wrongdoing, WITHOUT RECOURSE to the protection of the laws. The Evidence of this crime is UNDISPUTED. This is and has BEEN an ongoing denial of my 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendment RIGHTS in State Court. There is no case for your refusal to defend the Constitution per the 14th Amendment:

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

You are like the petty dictator conspiring with others for your own benefit to “defend power for the sake of defending power.” I remind you, your job is Justice under the law, not power for the sake of defending power.

USA Today is doing a series of stories, the Federal prosecutors series. They assert they have just uncovered the “"the tip of the iceberg"[6] because many more cases are tainted by misconduct than are found.”[7] Immunity is an all-consuming black hole. Light has trouble escaping. In the Jane Crow[8] Civil Rights era, I have to agree. They have not even begun to consider the much larger Black Hole Conspiracy to deny Rights sanctioned by the Malicious and Corrupt Judiciary’s assertion of absolute immunity.[9]Absolute immunity is a “Black Hole” that attempts to suck even the light of the TRUTH into its clutches. Absolute immunity will not tolerate any confrontation much less exposure to the truth. You as a Federal Judge are near the top of this ongoing Black Hole conspiracy, to deny Rights, deny Justice and deny the truth to “defend power for the sake of defending power.”

You assert the world order will come to an end if your Power is questioned. Absolute immunity as asserted by your corrupt, malicious and unconstitutional precedent’s Black Hole conspiracy in today’s Justice Department is at war with the Constitution’s explicit warranty for Rights. You deny the Constitution’s Authority as “the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby.”[10] You for self-serving reasons “defend power for the sake of defending power."

You and others describe your efforts as “honorable work.” You euphemistically say “that the violations were not deliberate,” “not malicious evil wrongdoing,” “People can lose their judgment in the heat of battle”[14] WITHOUT REGARD to your VICTIMS!!!! YOUR VICTIMS are very Un-euphemistically left to suffer the egregious denials, the loss of their own flesh and blood, their children, the loss of liberty, the loss of property and the loss of life.

Our CIVIL RIGHTS as written into our constitution are the essential minimum Inviolable and Inalienable RIGHTS “We the People” have established as the quintessential requirements for a civilization of free and equal persons. There is STRICT liability explicit in the text of the Constitution, common law, common sense and statute law:

“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress”[15]

This is in addition to and consummation of the original Supreme Court precedent establishing and thus DEFINING and LIMITING Judicial Review, in constitutional law, common law and common sense from 1803:

“The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection. In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.”[16]

Absolute Immunity as asserted by your corrupt, depraved, malicious Black Hole conspiracy of deliberate indifference to rights is abhorrent to the Rule of Law. I will see you humiliated and run out of town on a proverbial rail. I will PREVAIL even though I carry no weapons.

I have ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY.

the truth is on my side…

I have nothing left to losse.

The King’s subjects always bowed and sang the praises of the King. That is until they felt the sting of his corruption. Do we all need to feel the sting of the corruption? Or will we come to Justice William O. Douglas’s realization?

“The argument that the actions of public officials must not be subjected to judicial scrutiny because to do so would have an inhibiting effect[17] on their work is but a more sophisticated manner of saying "The King can do no wrong." Chief Justice Cockburn long ago disposed of the argument that liability would deter judges:

"I cannot believe that judges . . . would fail to discharge their duty faithfully and fearlessly according to their oaths and consciences . . . from any fear of exposing themselves to actions at law. I am persuaded that the number of such actions would be infinitely small, and would be easily disposed of. While, on the other hand, I can easily conceive cases in which judicial opportunity might be so perverted and abused for the purpose of injustice as that, on sound principles, the authors of such wrong ought to be responsible to the parties wronged. Dawkins v. Lord Paulet, L.R. 5 Q.B. 94, 110 (1869)(C.J. Cockburn, dissenting)".[18]

If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

-->The Jane Crow Era, “It doesn't take a cynic to point out that when a woman is getting a divorce, what she may truly fear is not violence, but losing the house or kids. Under an exparte order of protection, if she's willing to fib to the judge and say she is "in fear" of her children's father, she will get custody and money and probably the house.”

-->A fait accompli, "A man against whom a frivolous exparte order of protection has been brought starts to lose any power in his divorce proceeding. They do start decompensating, and they do start to have emotional issues, and they do start developing post-traumatic stress disorders. They keep replaying in their minds the tape of what happened to them in court. It starts this whole vicious downward cycle. They've been embarrassed and shamed in front of their family and friends, unjustly, and they totally lose any sense of self-control and self-respect. They may indeed become verbally abusive. It's difficult for the court to see where that person was prior to the restraining order." “The Booming Domestic Violence Industry” - Massachusetts News, 08/02/99, By John Maguire, Hitting below the beltMonday, 10/25/99 12:00 ET, By Cathy Young, Salon - Divorced men claim discrimination by state courts, 09/07/99, By Erica Noonan, Associated Press, Dads to Sue for Discrimination, 08/24/99, By Amy Sinatra, ABCNEWS.com, The Federal Scheme to Destroy Father-Child Relationships, by Jake Morphonios, 02/13/08

[17] "Whatever other concerns should shape a particular official's actions, certainly one of them should be the constitutional rights of individuals who will be affected by his actions. To criticize section 1983 liability because it leads decision makers to avoid the infringement of constitutional rights is to criticize one of the statute's raisons d'etre." Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622 (1980) Page 445 U. S. 657

I am not some crazy conspiracy fanatic, I do not see conspiracies everywhere. I have endured over 7 years of criminal denial, 411 days of illegal incarceration[1], two psychological examinations, and over three years of abject poverty, homelessness and life on the street in my struggle, Jeep v. United States of America.[2]

My issues revolve around unconcealed corrupt actions of the police, the prosecutors and the judges. This corruption was enumerated at or near the time of occurrence and the subsequent cover up of those, negligent, malicious and corrupt actions by a criminal conspiracy of deliberate depraved indifference to rights (Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights ).

I do not see a conspiracy against rights in “Texan declared innocent after 30 years in prison.” Eyewitnesses make mistakes there is no avoiding it. It could be likened to a fact of life almost, “Eyewitness: How Accurate Is Visual Memory?”(60 Minutes) Now given that eyewitness testimony has made mistakes, we need to improve the way we utilize eyewitness testimony to establish guilt e.g., double blind[3] photo arrays, unbiased computer photo lineups. As suggested by the 60 minutes story in North Carolina:

“showing victims lineup photos one at a time and emphasizing that the right answer may be none of the above, having lineups conducted by a person who doesn't know who the suspect is, or not by a person at all.

One system now used in a handful of cities is computer software Mike Gauldin helped develop to have a laptop conduct photo lineups.

But law professor Rich Rosen says that in the vast majority of places, there's been no reform, and that needs to change. "This is something that police officers can and should be in favor of," he told Stahl.” and other auditing measures.”[4]

In my cases, I told the police officers, the prosecuting attorneys and the Judges they had made a mistake before we went to trial and then repeated it before sentencing in the form formal pretrial[5] and post trial motions[6] and objections. Nonetheless the Police Officers, the Prosecuting attorneys and the Judge confirmed their criminality by purporting and/or allowing negligent, malicious, and corrupt testimony, thus criminal conspiracy of deliberate depraved indifference to rights.

There is no excuse for their undeniable CRIMINAL Conspiracy of depraved deliberate indifference to RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[3]double-blind study - an experimental procedure in which neither the subjects of the experiment nor the persons administering the experiment know the critical aspects of the experiment; "a double-blind procedure is used to guard against both experimenter bias and placebo effects"

GoFundMe

Contact Form

About Me

“Where
an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is
safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.

Where
there is an excess of liberty, the effect is the same, tho’ from an opposite
cause.

Government
is instituted to protect property of every sort, as well that which lies in the
various rights of individuals as that which the term particularly expresses.
This being the end of government, that alone is a just government which
impartially secures to every man whatever is his own.” James
Madison “Essays for the National Gazette 1791- 1792”

The
strength of human civilization is its ability to OVERCOME our purely animal
instincts… CO-OPERATE for the GREATER GOOD!!Human civilization is the only species on this planet capable of
overcoming the animal instinct of Herbert Spencer’s discredited “survival of
the fittest.”This ability is what makes
us human, what makes us dominant and what separates us from the animals.

The
United States of America was FOUNDED on the "Love of Virtue."The Founding Fathers based their
constitutional assertions on the love of virtue as defined by Montesquieu’s
republican government’s essential ingredient, the willingness to put the
interests of the community ahead of private interests.We need to remember the, at the time,
“REVOLUTIONARY” “Love of Virtue” that this country was founded upon….